Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: 2 bed flats and risk of being busted  (Read 2880 times)

fado19

  • Guest
Hi, has anyone ever been busted by the law at one of these 2 bed / 2 girl flat setups? They usually are via the likes of viva street. If they are termed as a brothal than isn't it easy for the police to look them up on the ads and go and bust them? Thanks


Offline Jonestown

The police know where all the parlours, brothels, saunas, etc are, if they want to raid them they will. If you happen to be there when they do they are highly unlikely to be interested in you, unless you start giving them cheek or are found with an underage girl.

Avogadrosnumber

  • Guest
Also the police have had far too many cuts and as a result are stretched thin. Obviously there is a very small chance and even if that happens they are not looking for you lol.

Offline Jerboa

It still not illegal as a punter to visit a brothel in the UK, this isn't America, even if the cops might pretend and tell you so if they do raid the joint, whilst you're pants down.

fado19

  • Guest
So one more on this. Has anyone been busted and given their name and address and had any kind of follow up? E.g some kind of letter to your address with a nice police badge on the envelope?

Offline Jerboa

So one more on this. Has anyone been busted and given their name and address and had any kind of follow up? E.g some kind of letter to your address with a nice police badge on the envelope?

Never heard of anyone getting this, it's not like you're curb crawling, you don't actually need to give any details to the cops in a raid, they might try to insist, and talk crap, but unless you've committed a crime or good likelihood you have then they don't need your details.

cerealpunter

  • Guest
It still not illegal as a punter to visit a brothel in the UK, this isn't America, even if the cops might pretend and tell you so if they do raid the joint, whilst you're pants down.

It would be illegal if the girls are controlled/coerced though, something you don't see much mention of on here, guys happily go along visiting the "foreign girls" who might be operating as in the op, but how many of these girls have come over here and set themselves up in apartments, I'm sure in most cases "sergei" or his equivalent must be behind it, so there would/could be a risk if it got raided

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,021
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
So one more on this. Has anyone been busted and given their name and address and had any kind of follow up? E.g some kind of letter to your address with a nice police badge on the envelope?

To be honest I don't think punting's for you with the level of paranoia you're showing here, either that or you're just a troll with all these 'what if this happens, what if that happens' type posts.

Maybe knitting or some such hobby would suit you more.

Offline Jerboa

To be honest I don't think punting's for you with the level of paranoia you're showing here, either that or you're just a troll with all these 'what if this happens, what if that happens' type posts.

Maybe knitting or some such hobby would suit you more.

Yes or train spotting eh?

Offline Jonestown

It's really not a good idea to refuse to identify yourself to the police, you're bound to come out worse in the encounter. Has any punter actually been brought to court to face the new legislation that Harriet Hartman introduced ?

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,021
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
It would be illegal if the girls are controlled/coerced though, something you don't see much mention of on here, guys happily go along visiting the "foreign girls" who might be operating as in the op, but how many of these girls have come over here and set themselves up in apartments, I'm sure in most cases "sergei" or his equivalent must be behind it, so there would/could be a risk if it got raided

It's still not illegal for a punter to see a prossie who's 'controlled' either by an agency, sergei  or whatever. They commit the offence of 'controlling prostitution for gain'.

It doesn't matter who sets them up in a flat as long as they aren't coerced or under age the punter hasn't committed any offence.


Yes or train spotting eh?

No no do you not realise how dangerous being next to a railway could be and what about any trespassing, could be asked for his name.     :sarcastic: :sarcastic:
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 08:53:46 am by daviemac »

Offline Jonestown

It's still not illegal for a punter to see a prossie who's 'controlled' either by an agency, sergei  or whatever. They commit the offence of 'controlling prostitution for gain'.

It doesn't matter who sets them up in a flat as long as they aren't coerced or under age the punter hasn't committed any offence.

It is illegal to pay for sex, or offer to pay for sex, with a girl who has been coerced, whether you know she has been coerced or not. That is Ms Harman's legacy to the sex trade.

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,021
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
It is illegal to pay for sex, or offer to pay for sex, with a girl who has been coerced, whether you know she has been coerced or not. That is Ms Harman's legacy to the sex trade.

That's what I said  :unknown: :unknown:   

Quote
It doesn't matter who sets them up in a flat as long as they aren't coerced or under age the punter hasn't committed any offence.

fado19

  • Guest
To be honest I don't think punting's for you with the level of paranoia you're showing here, either that or you're just a troll with all these 'what if this happens, what if that happens' type posts.

Maybe knitting or some such hobby would suit you more.

You do it your way. I'll do it mine. I wouldn't give a shit about some of these things if I was single. Good pre planning never hurt anyone.

Offline easyp123

Prostate massage is the best way to prolong. After that your dick will be hard as diamonds and you will last much longer. A finger (probably better with two) up the rusty sheriff's badge releases a lot of pre cum and satisfies the urge to shoot without doing so.

Offline Jimmyredcab

It would be illegal if the girls are controlled/coerced though, something you don't see much mention of on here.

It has been mentioned many times before.     :hi: :hi: :hi:

To the best of my knowledge no punter has ever been prosecuted under this stupid law ------------ I imagine that is because it would be very hard to prove that the punter knew the girl was being coerced ----------- if I am wrong maybe someone could provide a link to a successful prosecution.     :hi:

Offline Jimmyredcab

It is illegal to pay for sex, or offer to pay for sex, with a girl who has been coerced, whether you know she has been coerced or not. That is Ms Harman's legacy to the sex trade.

Any link to a prosecution would be welcome.      :hi: :hi: :hi:

Offline daviemac

  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 25,021
  • Likes: 369
  • Reviews: 24
Prostate massage is the best way to prolong. After that your dick will be hard as diamonds and you will last much longer. A finger (probably better with two) up the rusty sheriff's badge releases a lot of pre cum and satisfies the urge to shoot without doing so.

Are you on the right thread    :unknown:    not sure what this has to do with 2 girls in a flat. 

Offline Jonestown

Any link to a prosecution would be welcome.      :hi: :hi: :hi:

That's what I questioned on post #10 above.

I don't think any case has been brought to court under that legislation.

milo

  • Guest
it would be very hard to prove that the punter knew the girl was being coerced
It is a strict liability offence, so it is not necessary to prove the punter knew the girl was being coerced.
External Link/Members Only

Offline Jimmyredcab

It is a strict liability offence, so it is not necessary to prove the punter knew the girl was being coerced.
External Link/Members Only

You forgot the link to an example of where a punter has been successfully prosecuted, no hurry, in your own time.   :hi:


A stupid law introduced by a very stupid woman.    :bomb: :bomb: :bomb:

Offline Jonestown

The "exploitative conduct" tag has an interesting definition, you would think that even the most benevolent of pimping would fall foul of it.

vw

  • Guest
It is a strict liability offence, so it is not necessary to prove the punter knew the girl was being coerced.
External Link/Members Only

But has anyone ever been prosecuted for this ?

Links or court name and date would be helpful.

milo

  • Guest
You forgot the link to an example of where a punter has been successfully prosecuted, no hurry, in your own time.   :hi:


A stupid law introduced by a very stupid woman.    :bomb: :bomb: :bomb:
I didn't forget the link you ask for as I am not aware of one. I suspect such a link does not exist.

In my previous post I only wished to emphasise a point of the law. I was not making a comment on the rest of your post, which is why I didn't quote the whole of your post.

Offline Sir Lance-a-lot

However, a shortage of cash could cause the police to take an interest, as they can confisate a brothel-keeper's assets via POCA.  There was even one case where a WG had to take time off due to illness, and allowed another WG to use her home for awhile: the police raided it and took everything of value (including her dead mother's jewelry), because she couldn't prove that it hadn't been bought with proceeds from "organised crime".

Some police are utter cunts.

Not all of them though, which could explain why no punter appears to have been prosecuted under the "coercion" law.  Hard to say if that's because the police are more interested in the pimp than the punters, or whether it's because outright coercion is rare.  The police don't have to prove that the punter knew the WG was coerced, but presumably they still have to prove that she WAS coerced.

The recent Parliamentary inquiry recommended an immediate "cease and desist" on the persecution of well-run brothels, but this doesn't seem to have been taken onboard yet.

Offline Jimmyredcab

I didn't forget the link you ask for as I am not aware of one. I suspect such a link does not exist.

In my previous post I only wished to emphasise a point of the law.

Sometimes the law is an Ass.

Pointless making laws that are never enforced ------------------ it is now illegal to smoke in your car when kids are onboard, not one single prosecution.    :dash:

Offline smiths

Hi, has anyone ever been busted by the law at one of these 2 bed / 2 girl flat setups? They usually are via the likes of viva street. If they are termed as a brothal than isn't it easy for the police to look them up on the ads and go and bust them? Thanks

Some others have posted excellent info on this thread. A brothel that advertises for punters online and/or in local papers will always be fully known to the local police unless its just started. The top cops in the area either allow them to operate or not as suits them. One reason to allow a brothel to operate for a while is so the police can raid it later under POCA and try to seize the pimps assets. Another is the police know where the WGs and pimps are, I also hear some pimps are great grasses and sources of police intelligence.

A punter isn't breaking the law by punting in a brothel unless its proved a WG or WGs were underage and/or being coerced. If the WG is under 18 but over 13 there is a possible defence of her saying she was an adult, the WG is viewed as a victim even if over 16 but under 18. With coercion in theory its a strict liability offence so in doesn't matter if a punter wasn't aware, in effect he would have to prove he didn't know she was being coerced, I would love to see how a punter could prove that. As said prosecutions for this have been none or few, I think a punter did post up a few cases some time ago but cant recall who or when.

ANY WG could be being coerced and a punter wouldn't know, if that bothers you my advice is stick to wanking or pulling as that will always be the case in my view.

Offline Tricky Dickie

Any link to a prosecution would be welcome.      :hi: :hi: :hi:

No links but I did find some stats online on a government site. They are a little old. These are numbers for found guilty of "Paying or promising to pay a person to provide sexual services, where that person is subject to exploitative conduct to induce or encourage them to provide those services"

2010  43
2011  12
2012    6

So there have been *some* successful prosecutions but I'd think the chances of being convicted are very, very, very low.

Offline Jimmyredcab

However, a shortage of cash could cause the police to take an interest, as they can confisate a brothel-keeper's assets via POCA.  There was even one case where a WG had to take time off due to illness, and allowed another WG to use her home for awhile: the police raided it and took everything of value (including her dead mother's jewelry), because she couldn't prove that it hadn't been bought with proceeds from "organised crime".

Running a brothel is totally different to punting in a brothel ------------ I have no sympathy with pimps who have their assets taken, with high rewards come high risks.  :hi:

southampton.guy

  • Guest

A punter isn't breaking the law by punting in a brothel unless its proved a WG or WGs were underage and/or being coerced. If the WG is under 18 but over 13 there is a possible defence of her saying she was an adult, the WG is viewed as a victim even if over 16 but under 18. With coercion in theory its a strict liability offence so in doesn't matter if a punter wasn't aware, in effect he would have to prove he didn't know she was being coerced,

now i.m not an expert on law, but thats not quite as i understand it. I don.t think you can "prove you didn.t know" as in law it doesn.t matter (for a strict liability offence). a little while ago there was a case of a guy (mid 20's) who got done for under age sex - although he met her in a night club that had a (good) reputation for id/age checks but she used believeable but fake ID, she chased him, was done up to the nines, said she was aged 19, looked it but was only 13. he still got done as there is NO DEFENCE.

But agree, there are certain risks in this game, we try to minimise them beyound that, if its still too much risk for you, don.t do it!!
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 12:21:10 pm by southampton.guy »

Offline smiths

now i.m not an expert on law, but thats not quite as i understand it. I don.t think you can "prove you didn.t know" as in law it doesn.t matter (for a strict liability offence). a little while ago there was a case of a guy (mid 20's) who got done for under age sex - although he met her in a night club that had a (good) reputation for id/age checks but she used believeable but fake ID, she chased him, was done up to the nines, said she was aged 19, looked it but was only 13. he still got done as there is NO DEFENCE.

But agree, there are certain risks in this game, we try to minimise them beyound that, if its still too much risk for you, don.t do it!!

If you read the CPS website prostitution section it clearly states there could be a defence if over 13 but under 18, I assume that is up to date current information.

Offline smiths

CPS website section to check is Exploitation of Prostitution (Children) where it clearly states "A reasonable belief the child is over 18 affords a defence if the child is 13 or over. No defence of reasonable belief if under 13". I assume the CPS keep their site up to date with current laws.

Obviously each case if it goes to court is tried on its individual merits and circumstances, and if a person pleads not guilty one jury could find them guilty while another wouldn't, but this is the broad terms of the law on this.

Offline smiths

CPS website section to check is Exploitation of Prostitution (Children) where it clearly states "A reasonable belief the child is over 18 affords a defence if the child is 13 or over. No defence of reasonable belief if under 13". I assume the CPS keep their site up to date with current laws.

Obviously each case if it goes to court is tried on its individual merits and circumstances, and if a person pleads not guilty one jury could find them guilty while another wouldn't, but this is the broad terms of the law on this.

Further to this I see a female judge in Glasgow has given a man an absolute discharge for admitting rape after having sex with a a 12 year year old girl who he said he thought was 16. The judge said it was a wholly exceptional decision not to sentence the man.

milo

  • Guest
Further to this I see a female judge in Glasgow has given a man an absolute discharge for admitting rape after having sex with a a 12 year year old girl who he said he thought was 16. The judge said it was a wholly exceptional decision not to sentence the man.
External Link/Members Only

bobbles1945

  • Guest
Here you go

External Link/Members Only

However a more detailed examination of the prosecutions show that only a couple of police forces were using the act and that they were largely misapplying it to charge kerb crawlers see here
DOI: 10.1111/hojo.12060-full text here External Link/Members Only

Offline smiths

External Link/Members Only

Thanks. The heart of the case is the police who saw this girl, the taxi driver and even the judge thought she didn't look as young as 12. As in law that doesn't matter if under 13 which is why the man was prosecuted in the first place and pleaded guilty there must be grounds for appeal if that's what the prosecution decide citing the judge hasn't the right to say what she has. I think his age at the time helped him and the fact the judge believed he really wasn't aware and is really sorry.

What it shows if the judges decision stands is exceptions to strict liability are possible dependent on the circumstances.

Offline Thecunninglinguist

As English law does not apply in Scotland the CPS advice does not apply. It would be the Procurator Fiscal. I can't see how this case can be left where it is and some way will be found in reopening it to adjust the sentence, it just can't be allowed to stand. In any event it will have no bearing whatever in a court in England or Wales and could never be cited by a defence as precident.

Offline smiths

As English law does not apply in Scotland the CPS advice does not apply. It would be the Procurator Fiscal. I can't see how this case can be left where it is and some way will be found in reopening it to adjust the sentence, it just can't be allowed to stand. In any event it will have no bearing whatever in a court in England or Wales and could never be cited by a defence as precident.

Scottish law is the same on this I thought, so if the girl is under 13 consent cant be given so believing she was older isn't a defence, or am I wrong about that? Plus of course he pleaded guilty anyway.


Offline Thecunninglinguist

Scottish law is the same on this I thought, so if the girl is under 13 consent cant be given so believing she was older isn't a defence, or am I wrong about that? Plus of course he pleaded guilty anyway.
Yes you are quite right. The laws are the same, just not the same laws, if that makes sense? The Scottish and England/Wales ones are completely separate in different juristictions, even if they basically are the same or similar.

Offline smiths

Yes you are quite right. The laws are the same, just not the same laws, if that makes sense? The Scottish and England/Wales ones are completely separate in different juristictions, even if they basically are the same or similar.

Indeed I understand.